About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
america are movies, tv, science, technology. they're not keen on democracy as america preaches it. heading into another four years of the obama administration, where are we, and why are we here, and how do we get somewhere else? what went wrong, what is going right, and what to do about it going forward? >> first of all, i do not think that favorability ratings and the pew surveys of evidence of whether we're doing something wrong or right. i think it is a huge mistake for anybody who practices public diplomacy to think that his or her job is to win a popularity contest. well i guess maybe some of us who were in the bush administration can take a certain pleasure in effect in 2008, the favorability ratings for the united states were higher in four out of the five surveyed arab countries -- i am not even going to bring that up. [laughter] and it is a big mistake. in my view, and what i tried to do during my short tenure as undersecretary, is try to focus attention on what public diplomacy can do to achieve specific ends that are part of their goals in foreign policy and national security po
as advances in military and defense technology. from last week, this runs just over an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, welcome. my name is gideon and i'm the editor of foreign affairs and it is a wonderful privilege and honor and pleasure to be here again at the halifax from. foreign affairs is in the business of serious discussions by knowledgeable people with important issues, free and frank exchanges on the most important questions out there and that's actually the same business that halifax is and so we are delighted to be the media sponsor, and it is going to be fantastic weekend. let me just cut right to the chase. we have a fantastic panel, and more importantly, a great topic and a wonderful group with all of you as well and so let's get right to it. our panelists here, david singer of "the new york times," the former undersecretary deputy secretary of state for global affairs now a fellow at the center at harvard. the head of telefax holders distinguished sibling, the munich security conference where they have a great group. the point of the session is to do some big thinking on
a major, new bold investment program, going into a new market, expanding a new technology, ect., you are worried about what the tax rate will be when that's generates cash in nine years. the best thing to do is create a lower rate, an expectation that there's not giant tax increases later. >> i agree with that. i think we should do in, but, a, you know we have the highest statutory right and no higher than average effective rates because we have the narrowest base of owl corporate income in the world. >> yeah. >> one of the reasons we have that system is because people like us argued for many years that the more efficient thing, the more, the better way to encourage investment was not to cut the corporate rate, but to have massively accelerated depreciation, expansion of investment, focusing on incentives rather than cutting the rate overall. i think the intuition is changing, but the way we're going it cut the rate is not by closing loopholes, but come out a painful expansions of the base like getting rid of accelerated depreciation and things which have a value so i think -- >> is
cain in ohio, and came within two points. the technology included the so-called system, which was the republican get out the vote technology to ensure we targeted people to get to the polls. that imploded. i'm told on election day, actually, so many hits from around the country as it should have saying, gee, this person voted, this person didn't, target calls, thought it was under attack, and closed down. for those of you here from, again, the technology field with the politics, we, republicans, want to talk to you. [laughter] we need help. the democrat system is calledded gordon, it was effective at microtargetting, and i heard a lot of antedotes, and you'll love somebody gets a call who is a democrat in law school, and it was gee, you know, we see that you have voted, this information is public available. we see you voted at two o'clock on election day, but your sister, at two lane, has not voted, could you call her? that's the level at which they were dealing, whereas, you know, we were flying blind at that point. part of it is technology, and part of a turnout that was imp
american nation, the congress especially, has caved into this military worship of technology. i've seen that in the last 20 years grow. in the '90s and 2000s, we seem to give a pass always to the military. >> since i get over here about the military, it's almost impossible to criticize anyone in the military because there's such patriotism towards it, and i get that, but it is particularly pronounced in america, it is almost seen as utter disloyalty, if not treachery, to criticize any military man or woman. that's dangerous, isn't it? >> it leads back to rome. go back to the roman empire. the pretorian guard. emperors would pay homage and favors and pay them more money to be loyal to that faction. eventually, the roman guards, military, became more important than the citizenry. of course, they didn't hold up the empire. they are all over the place but they couldn't hold back the barbarians and so forth. it doesn't work. you don't bribe the military. and, frankly, we could be in a position where things get more chaotic and there could be another terrorist attack and this concept of ameri
. trying to use new, smart technology, that kind of stuff, pretending to get solutions and at the same time, let's say the political diplomatic approach doesn't provide solution in the end. so, isn't it a signal that we are shifting from her politics and diplomacy and rely on tools of solutions. >> is the war on terror divided into a problem rather than addressing the more fundamental issues that might have led to the spread in popularity of chiapas in the first place? >> i certainly think the footprint strategy is intended to do exactly what the questioner is suggesting here, which is simply one of containment, but to do without sending in 100,000 troops and accepting a chilling doublers along the way. but you think about the american reaction to 9/11, 9/11 cost the attackers may be have been dollars of "the new york times" went about trying to do an assessment at the 10 year anniversary of what we spend in total in reaction to 9/11. everything from rebuilding the buildings to the wars in afghanistan and iraq to homeland security and so forth. the number we came up with was $3.3 trillion i
] super-weird! oh, is it febreze? yeah. ohh, how about that? febreze has anti-clogging technology that keeps it smelling fresh, even after 30 days. febreze. breathe happy. [ birds chirping ] are you sure you can fit in there? [ chuckles ] ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] around view monitor with bird's-eye view. nice work. [ male announcer ] introducing the all-new nissan pathfinder. it's our most innovative pathfinder ever. nissan. innovation that cites. ♪ >> sean: tonight, we are learning new details about the escalating violence between israel and gaza. earlier today, israel launched an airstrike against hamas military commander, jabari, who has long topped israel's most wanted list, after overseeing the abduction of an israeli soldier and plotting attacks against israelis. a former defense spokesman said this is the israeli equivalent of america's strike against bin laden. the islamist group saying that israel has opened up the gates of hell. earlier tonight, president obama spoke to israeli prime minister netanyahu, reiterating israel's right to self-defense. we have tony shaver
. ohh, how about that? febreze has anti-clogging technology that keeps it smelling fresh, even after 30 days. febreze. breathe happy. >> sean: as we focus on the political security implications of the petraeus issue, we are learning how much access the alleged misstress, paula broadwell had. the fbi raided her home and came out with boxes and boxes of evidence that is believed to include some of the classified information. we have learned that david petraeus has agreed to testify before congress in a closed hearing on friday. here with more, bill cunningham and michael brown. what is jure overall take on where this goes? >> i am sure, sean hannity, you would agree and michael brown would agree, this is a disastrous start to a second term. you have the cia director in a sex scandal. the commander of forces in afghanistan, sexting with a hot chick in tampa. rome is burning. the middle-east is in flames and obama is hold egg news conference with cupcakes thrown by magnolia bakery. how could this be worse for barack obama? how could it be any worse? michael, you explain to me. >> i imagine
be a light footprint with technological containment of the problem. when i hear $3.3 trillion, i hear the bulk of it is because of what happened on 9/11. my question is, in the new normal, what is the role for militant extremism? is it releasing them from jail and giving them a space and controlling them technologically? thank you. >> i will star with the last. if you think the light footprint strategy is all about containment, then it does raise the question of what are the limits of light footprint? what have we discovered it does not do terribly well? it does not build justice or build the kind of global development that paula was discussing before. it deliberately pulls the united states back from a kind of the engagement that we thought in the post-cold war world that we were heading into. and frankly, you might of thought we were heading into it just listening to president obama during the 2008 campaign when he talked mostly about engagement strategy. we did not hear a lot of discussion about what we have all been talking about here today. i think the fact that we have seen the
poorly on the president? >> i'm afraid i blame everything on technology. i don't think this is an unusual thing to happen. it's just that we have a complete electronic trail. i think for thousands of years you've had adultery and all these things. >> brian: you're talk being the actual act. i'm talking about the president knowing. >> i'm also saying i don't think the president would know. you wouldn't have the f.b.i. investigating the c.i.a. if you didn't have all this electronic trail to follow. i don't think you would have all that. >> brian: but this is something that results in some type of blackmail in. >> yes. >> brian: that's the -- >> that's the problem. you have peter king, chairman of the homeland security committee in the house suggesting that perhaps general petraeus' testimony to them was compromised, briefing was compromised. >> brian: because that testimony included? >> the cover-up line about benghazi, which is that this was somehow part of a massive mob stimulated by the -- >> brian: a democrat said this hit me like a lightning bolt. they should have been briefed. >> we k
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)